• i_had_name@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    44
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    Nuclear is easily the best path forward and even when you consider events like Chernoble, the harm on humanity is vastly dwarfed by what coal has done to us.

    • Atom@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Johnny Harris and Big If True have a great video discussing fear and actual nuclear impacts. The only factor it lacks mentioning is how much land fossil fuels takes up. Each year, fossil fuels infrastructure distroys more land than Chernobyl and fukushima combined.

      • CodeInvasion@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Agreed, except Johnny Harris routinely has no idea what he is talking about and does a horrible job at explaining factual content. He does tell an incredible story, however.

        • Atom@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Lol, that’s a first for me. Uranium is an element likely formed during a supernova event 6 billion years ago. It is absolutely not a fossil fuel

          • Lols [they/them]@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            yup, mixed up fossil and non-renewable

            thats why it was deleted less than 5 minutes after posting it, and a solid hour before you responded to it

          • Lols [they/them]@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            yup, mixed up fossil and non-renewable

            thats why it was deleted less than 5 minutes after posting it, and a solid hour before you responded to it

    • Jnxl@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I doubt nuclear alone would suffice to power our civilization. Of course, you didn’t say that.

      Oil has been quite easy energy source enabling complex supply chains and I don’t think we can change them to electric or nuclear powered ones.

      We’ve had a horrible track record on waste disposal. Climate change is the result of our failure to dispose of CO2 from burning fossil fuels and that’s also why I’m wary of us dealing with nuclear waste.

      • ThatWeirdGuy1001@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s been mathematically proven that it could power our entire planet multiple times over for centuries. The waste created from nuclear power is much easier to keep from entering the environment than coal/oil.

        It’s factually safer and more efficient. You’re just spewing corporate fear mongering designed to keep oil barons in control.

    • keeb420@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      and instead of building plants with learnings from those events we continue to do nothing with nuclear, relying on ever aging tech and facilities. id love to see small nuclear reactors or some of the other designs being put into use. we also need to spread renewables around as well. if every house was its own powersource and onl relied on the grid for backup things would be cleaner.

        • merc@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Sometimes I can guess what a Cyrillic word is, because a few of the letters are similar to roman letters. Like, the K letters are similar, some of the vowels are similar, etc. But, I’d never have guessed that had anything to do with Chernobyl.